It seems beyond doubt that in the aboriginal society the husband

Question

Adapted from The Family Among the Australian Aborigines: a Sociological Study by Bronislaw Malinowski (1913)

It seems beyond doubt that in the aboriginal society, the husband exercised almost complete authority over his wife; she was entirely in his hands and might ill-treat her, provided he did not kill her. Out of our thirty statements, in six cases (Kurnai, Bangerang, Lower Murray tribes, according to Bonney, Geawe-Gal, Port Jackson tribes, North-west Central Queenslanders) the absolute authority of the husband is explicitly affirmed. We read in them either the bare statement that the husband had absolute power over his family; or, in the better of them, we are more exactly informed that he had only to abstain from inflicting death on his wife. It was the latter's kinsman who would avenge her (Kurnai, Bangerang, North-west Central Queenslanders). It is difficult to ascertain in what form society would interfere with the husband if he transgressed the limits of his legal authority, i. e. killed his wife. Curr informs us that the woman's relatives would avenge her death. Howitt says that there would ensue a blood feud, which comes nearly to the same. It is very probable that the woman's kin retained some rights of protection. The remaining statements implicitly declare that the husband's authority was very extensive. (Encounter Bay tribes according to Meyer; New South Wales tribes according to Hodgson; Port Stephens tribes according to R. Dawson; Arunta; Herbert River tribes; Queenslanders according to Palmer; Moreton Bay tribes according to J. D. Lang; South-Western tribes according to Salvado; West Australians according to Grey.) It is clear that wherever we read of excessive harshness and bad treatment, wounds, and blows inflicted on women, the husband must possess the authority to do it; in other words, he does not find any social barrier preventing him from ill-treatment. Especially as, in these statements, such ill-treatment is mentioned to be the rule and not an exception. In two statements we can gather no information on this point. According to the statement of J. Dawson on the West Victoria tribes, the husband's authority appears strictly limited by the potential intervention of the chief, who could even divorce the woman if she complained. But Curr warns us against Dawson's information concerning the chief and his power. Curr's arguments appear to be very conclusive. Too much weight cannot be attached, therefore, to Dawson's exceptional statement. Discarding it, we see that we have on this point fairly clear information. We may assume that society interfered but seldom with the husband, in fact, only in the extreme case of his killing his wife. Six statements are directly, and the remainder indirectly, in favor of this view, and the only one contradictory is not very trustworthy.    1 
 1. The author dismisses the argument by Dawson largely because __________.

A. the author has a personal problem with Duncan
B. Dawson's argument largely does not add anything to the author's argument
C. the author has used enough sources before he considers Duncan's argument
D. Dawson discusses a different issue than the one the author does
E. another academic has largely rebutted Duncan's claims

2 
 2. According to the passage, which of the following statements accurately reflects the authority of husbands in aboriginal societies?

A. Husbands had complete authority over their wives and could ill-treat them without any restrictions.
B. Society always intervened to protect wives from ill-treatment by their husbands.
C. The authority of husbands varied across different aboriginal societies.
D. The passage does not provide enough information to determine the authority of husbands.
E. Husbands had limited authority over their wives and required societal approval for any ill-treatment.

3 
 3. Based on the passage, which of the following is true regarding the extent of societal interference in cases of husband's ill-treatment?

A. Society frequently intervened to protect wives from ill-treatment by their husbands.
B. The passage does not provide any information about societal interference in cases of ill-treatment.
C. Society rarely interfered, except in extreme cases where the husband killed his wife.
D. Society always intervened to prevent any form of ill-treatment by husbands.
E. The passage provides contradictory information about societal interference.

Sajjad1994 · Answer

Explanation

2. According to the passage, which of the following statements accurately reflects the authority of husbands in aboriginal societies?

Explanation

The passage provides information about the authority of husbands in different aboriginal societies, stating that the authority of husbands varied. In some cases, the absolute authority of the husband is explicitly affirmed, while in other cases, it is mentioned that the husband had to abstain from inflicting death on his wife and that her kinsman would avenge her. The passage also mentions that it is difficult to ascertain how society would interfere if the husband transgressed the limits of his legal authority. Therefore, the passage supports the idea that the authority of husbands differed across different aboriginal societies.  Option C  accurately reflects this information provided in the passage.

Answer: C

Sajjad1994 · Answer

Explanation

1. The author dismisses the argument by Dawson largely because __________.

Explanation

The passage mentions that Curr warns against Dawson's information concerning the chief and his power, and the author finds Curr's arguments to be very conclusive. This implies that another academic (Curr) has largely rebutted Dawson's claims, supporting  option (E)  as a correct.

A.  The passage does not provide any evidence or indication that the author has a personal problem with Duncan. The dismissal is based on the content and credibility of Dawson's specific claim rather than any personal bias.

B.  The passage does not suggest that Dawson's argument is irrelevant or adds nothing to the author's argument. Instead, it specifically addresses and dismisses Dawson's claim because of concerns about its accuracy and Curr's counterarguments.

C.  There is no indication in the passage that the author dismisses Dawson's argument because they feel they have used enough sources. The dismissal is based on the specific issues with Dawson's claim and the strength of Curr's counterarguments.

D.  This is the opposite of the correct explanation. The passage suggests that Dawson's argument is on the same topic - the husband's authority in aboriginal society. However, the author dismisses Dawson's specific claim about the potential intervention of the chief, finding it untrustworthy.

In summary,  option (E)  is correct because the passage implies that another academic (Curr) has largely rebutted Dawson's claims, while the other options do not accurately reflect the reasons for the dismissal of Dawson's argument in the passage.

Answer: E

parthwagh · Answer

Main Point:  The passage discusses the extent of a husband's authority over his wife in aboriginal societies and the conditions under which society would interfere if the husband overstepped his bounds, particularly in cases of ill-treatment that did not result in the wife's death.

Tone of Author:  The tone of the author is  neutral . The author is presenting observations and data without expressing personal feelings towards the subject matter.

Paragraph Summaries and Connections:
- In the first part, the author presents evidence that in many aboriginal societies, husbands had almost complete authority over their wives, with the main restriction being that they should not kill their wives. The author cites several cases to support this claim.
- The second part discusses the societal response if a husband killed his wife, noting that the wife's relatives would seek vengeance, and there might be a blood feud. The author suggests that the woman's kin retained some protective rights.
- The third part mentions that the harsh treatment of wives is seen as an indication of the husband's authority, as it was often the rule rather than the exception.
- The final part addresses a contradictory statement provided by J. Dawson, which the author dismisses based on Curr's rebuttal, reinforcing the main argument that society seldom interfered unless the husband killed his wife.

Answers to Questions:

Question 1: The author dismisses the argument by Dawson largely because __________.
 Correct Answer: E.  another academic has largely rebutted Dawson's claims
Explanation: The author dismisses Dawson's claims because Curr provides a rebuttal that the author considers very conclusive. The passage states, "But Curr warns us against Dawson's information concerning the chief and his power. Curr's arguments appear to be very conclusive."

Incorrect Answer Choices:
A is incorrect because there is no mention of a personal issue the author has with Dawson (also, the name mentioned is Dawson, not Duncan).
B is incorrect because the author does not dismiss Dawson's argument for being redundant; the issue is its reliability.
C is incorrect because the number of sources is not the reason for dismissal; it's the credibility of Dawson's claims that is in question.
D is incorrect because Dawson is discussing the same issue of husband's authority, but provides a differing viewpoint.

parthwagh · Answer

Question 2: According to the passage, which of the following statements accurately reflects the authority of husbands in aboriginal societies?
 Correct Answer: C.  The authority of husbands varied across different aboriginal societies.
Explanation: The passage mentions that in most cases, husbands had extensive authority, but it also notes an exception provided by Dawson, which suggests that authority varied. The passage does not claim that the authority was the same in all societies.

Incorrect Answer Choices:
A is incorrect because while husbands had significant authority, it was not without restrictions, as they could not kill their wives.
B is incorrect because the passage states that society interfered only rarely, not always.
D is incorrect because the passage provides ample information on the husband's authority.
E is incorrect because the passage indicates that husbands generally had extensive authority, not limited.

Question 3: Based on the passage, which of the following is true regarding the extent of societal interference in cases of husband's ill-treatment?
 Correct Answer: C.  Society rarely interfered, except in extreme cases where the husband killed his wife.
Explanation: The passage explains that society's interference was limited and usually only occurred in the extreme case of the husband killing his wife.

Incorrect Answer Choices:
A is incorrect because the passage indicates that intervention was rare, not frequent.
B is incorrect because the passage provides information about societal interference.
D is incorrect because society did not always intervene; it did so mainly in extreme cases.
E is incorrect because the passage does not provide contradictory information; it consistently suggests limited societal interference.

It seems beyond doubt that in the aboriginal society the husband

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Reading Comprehension (RC) Questions

It seems beyond doubt that in the aboriginal society the husband

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards